Bitch Media - Michael Bayhttp://bitchmagazine.org/taxonomy/term/3674/0
enAll Aboard the Douchebag Train! A Roundup.http://bitchmagazine.org/post/all-aboard-the-douchebag-train-a-roundup
<p><center>
<p><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3214/3008635758_a8c6604670.jpg?v=1226622254" /></p></center></p>
<p><a title="bhive" name="bhive"><b></b></a></p>
<p><b>From the &quot;Breaking News, circa 1964&quot; File</b></p>
<p>• Check out this piece from the Onion, &quot;As Men's Job Losses Mount, Wives Feel the Impact.&quot; Oh wait, that's an actual headline from <a href="http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1909025,00.html?xid=rss-topstories">Time</a> magazine. The latest in the <a href="http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/06/the-he-conomy-do-men-take-too-many-risks/">&quot;which gender has it worst when the economy sucks?&quot; </a> is a real let down:</p>
<blockquote><p>
&quot;[Many other women are upset] — wives of the 4.2 million men who have been laid off since the recession began. In fact, according to recent data, it is likely that more than 2 million American women are married to someone who has been handed a pink slip during this recession. Compare that to the approximately 1.4 million women who have lost a job, and it appears that the majority of women may be experiencing our Great Recession's mass job losses not as a laid-off worker but as the spouse of one. And while a lot of attention has been paid to those who have lost their job — some 75% of whom have been men — the impact of these losses on spouses has been largely ignored. </p>
<p>To be sure, many of these cuts affect both the husband and wife, but women — even those who work outside the home — still take on more household responsibilities, including cooking, cleaning and taking care of children, whatever their ages.</p>
<p>Yet a husband's job loss is a family event that affects everyone — especially spouses, according to Alan Pickman, a psychologist and outplacement specialist with Lee Hecht Harrison as well as the author of The Complete Guide to Outplacement Counseling. While both the husband and wife may struggle with new financial fears and feelings of anger and betrayal, &quot;the spouse's response may be even more intense than it was for the individual male who lost his job,&quot; says Pickman. Most experts agree that may be because wives feel powerless — both about the job loss as well as the family's future, since only the displaced husband can get himself a new job.</p></blockquote>
<p>While this article could be interesting if it actually followed up on the spouses--both employed or unemployed, both male and female--of laid-off partners, it just essentializes women and wives. Women are framed as domestic partners rather than the more complicated and intersecting roles of mothers, caretakers, workers, and breadwinners. Lumping women into one category without successfully recognizing the immense amount of work (paid or unpaid) women perform doesn't constitute news in my book.<br />
<center><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2616/3705723366_c80ddb16c2.jpg?v=0" /></center><br />
<center><i>Also not a joke: This was the photo accompanying the article</i></center></p>
<hr />
<p><a title="Hollywood" name="Hollywood"><b>From the &quot;Tinseltown Trash&quot; File</b></a></p>
<p>• As a follow-up to last week's <a href="/post/transformers-2">Decree, </a>Michael Bay has managed to <a href="http://www.nypost.com/seven/07072009/gossip/pagesix/michael_bay_made_megan_fox_wash_ferrari__177947.htm">dig himself deeper into douchebaggery. </a></p>
<p>• <a href="http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118005715.html?categoryId=13&amp;cs=1">Variety </a>reports Baywatch is being made into &quot;bigscreen comedy&quot; directed by Jeremy Garelick. I guess God heard my prayers that what the world needs is more past TV shows made into slapstick comedies (especially ones that will no doubt tout objectification as humor). Of the fourteen names listed in the article as backing, directing, relating to the film in anyway, all fourteen are males. They can all Garelick my----nevermind. </p>
<p><center><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3240/3704915631_19e0979ec7.jpg?v=0" /></center><br />
<center><i>No way I'm buying a ticket...not if the 'Hoff is off</i></center><br />
<hr />
</p><p><a title="bloggin" name="bloggin"><b>From the &quot;Who Knew this Rando Sexist Website Even Existed?&quot; File</b></a></p>
<p>• The blog <a href="http://www.wwtdd.com/">What Would Tyler Durden Do?</a> (&quot;A Safe Space for Douchebags&quot;) posted <a href="http://www.wwtdd.com/2009/07/how-should-women-dress/">&quot;How Should Women Dress?&quot; </a>featuring Kendra Wilkinson (of <i>Girls Next Door</i> fame) in a coy golf position, a typical post on this All Things T&amp;A website.</p>
<blockquote><p>Dressing sexy is all about attitude. Looks don't really matter. Unless you're unattractive or overweight, in which case looks very much do matter. If a girl is built like Kendra, she should dress exactly like Kendra. Every day, all the time....If the girl isn't built like Kendra, um … I don't know. I guess maybe an invisibility cloak or something. What's the point to even being a girl if you're not gonna look like Kendra?</p></blockquote>
<p>'Nuff said. What's interesting is that Kendra Wilkinson <a href="http://kendrawilkinson.celebuzz.com/2009/07/what-women-should-wear/">responded on her own blog.</a> Posing in baggy sweats, Kendra writes</p>
<blockquote><p>
Well Brendon, i see what you're saying about "attitude" because i agree that this is what matters. There's nothing SEXIER than confidence in a woman!!!! Weight doesnt matter… at the end of the day everybody has a different standard for what turns them on...The way i dress represents who i am and i think everyone should just dress in whatever makes them feel good.</p>
<p>And while im totally flattered u like the way i look and dress.. i just hope u dont make other women feel like they have to wear a "cloak" if they dont look like a playmate!</p></blockquote>
<p>While &quot;whats up with the whole double standard anyway?&quot; isn't the sharpest feminist rhetoric I've heard, it's cool that Kendra stood up for herself. She goes on: </p>
<blockquote><p>There are probably tons of men out there that find thick librarians smokin hottt! LOL. Maybe men should start walking around with their hands cupped on their junk and tank tops that show off their abs… um, but only if they're built like football players :) lolololol. </p></blockquote>
<p> Ooh...about that.</p>
<p><center><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2652/3705723220_ce04aac3a6_m.jpg" /> <i>vs.</i> <img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2525/3705723286_4a5a5427aa_m.jpg" /></center><br />
<center><i>Don't...know how...to feel...about problematic...but well-intentioned Playmate</i></center></p>
<p>• Some guy with too much time (and expendable income--buy my tampons!) decided to <a href="http://www.zug.com/live/81776/The-Tampon-Trials-Which-Tampon-is-LEAST-Absorbent.html">test which tampons are the least absorbent. </a>Why? Because he just learned about Toxic Shock Syndrome, and using the logic that the more absorbent the tampon, the more likely a woman might get TSS...because the tampon would be so saturated it would, in his words, EXPLODE LIKE A BOMB.</p>
<p>Saxbury spends his time harassing Seventh Generation, <a href="http://www.zug.com/live/81777/The-Tampon-Trials-Part-2.html">photoshopping tampon boxes in a metal studio,</a> and sitting outside watching <a href="http://www.zug.com/live/81787/The-Tampon-Trials-Part-3.html">various red liquids for 45 minutes.</a></p>
<p>The point of this middle-school experiment is all in the name of humor, the gist being women's body parts and functions are so WEIRD and GROSS! And as a man, it is INCONCEIVABLE to even spend more than 3 seconds conceptualizing what a tampon does! Or how babies are actually made! The sad thing is that it's obvious he really doesn't have any idea how women's bodies work. </p>
<blockquote><p>Up next, tomato paste. This thick, red fluid would be a true test of the tampons' absorbent qualities.</p></blockquote>
<p>Ummm what? I would need more than Playtex if something with the consistency of tomato paste starts coming out my vajay. </p>
<p><center><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3531/3705723532_4a43d4d2e1.jpg?v=0" /></center><br />
<center><i>Stay away from my vajay</i></center></p>
<hr />
<p><a title="congress" name="congress"><b>In the "Even Right Wingers Think You're Too Right Wing" File: </b></a></p>
<p>• Wonkette reports on the <a href="http://wonkette.com/409732/lone-fartsack-votes-against-resolution-to-thank-slaves-for-building-the-capitol">&quot;Lone Fartsack Votes Against Resolution To Thank Slaves For Building The Capitol.&quot; </a>Iowan Congressman Steve King was the ONLY dissenter on a measure for a plaque recognizing the slave labor that contributed to the building of the Capitol. </p>
<p><center><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2668/3704915165_d49cba353b.jpg?v=0" /></center><br />
<center><i>D-Bag</i></center></p>
<p>King later <a href="http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/07/steve-king-i-opposed-yet-another-bill-to-commemorate-slavery-in-order-to-protect-judeo-christian-her.php">defended his vote.</a></p>
<blockquote><p>&quot;Last night I opposed yet another bill to erect another monument to slavery because it was used as a bargaining chip to allow for the actual depiction of 'In God We Trust' in the CVC....This is just the latest example of a several year effort by liberals in Congress to scrub references to America's Christian heritage from our nation's Capitol. <b>Liberals want to amend our country's history to eradicate the role of Christianity in America and chisel references to God or faith from our historical buildings.</b></p></blockquote>
<p>...Prompting the DCCC national press secretary Ryan Rudominer to respond accordingly: </p>
<blockquote><p>&quot;Steve King's lone vote against acknowledging the role slaves played in the construction of the United States Capitol is a slap in the face to the very sacrifices and contributions African Americans made to our nation. <b>This is the latest in a long line of erratic behavior from King that has made him an embarrassment to Iowans and to the Republican Party.&quot;</b></p></blockquote>
<p>• <a href="http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&amp;pageId=103324">Olivia St. John</a>, columnist who's bringing a new argument to Sarah Palin's resignation, one that's filled with conservative and feminist doublespeak! </p>
<blockquote><p>Palin is an avowed feminist. As such, her husband and children have to fall in line behind her career goals. If everyday actions speak louder than words, then she holds more affinity with her pro-abortion feminist sisters than with her conservative sisters nursing babies at home.</p>
<p>Has America become so emasculated that our only hope of getting another Ronald Reagan into the Oval Office is to idolize Palin as a political Madonna? Hardly. Do we have no men who can match her intelligence, charisma and leadership skills? To the contrary, we have better. Have conservatives become so desperate for a passionate leader that they forsake their most basic values of home and hearth? Yes, but it's more than that.</p>
<p>Sarah Palin represents the empirical self of millions of women working outside the home. They live vicariously through her supposed success. Seeing such a woman extolled gives credibility to their frantic lifestyle juggling job, children, husband, church, and housework.</p>
<p>There are certainly some valid reasons to support Sarah Palin. Her passion for the unborn is refreshing. Her strong support of Second Amendment gun rights is vital to our personal and national security. But her easy dismissal of the value of being at the center of a home and her children's lives seems antithetical to true, conservative &quot;family values.&quot;</p>
<p>Our society has so twisted the distinctiveness of womanhood that we no longer recognize it. If our Founding Fathers could see their country now, what would they say about women fighting in combat overseas? What would they think about a mother of a young baby being the commander in chief of America's military? What would they say as she walked the line exchanging salutes with soldiers? They would hang their heads in shame. </p></blockquote>
<p>Do I defend feminists? Do I defend Sarah Palin?! If you can make sense of that, let me know! </p>
http://bitchmagazine.org/post/all-aboard-the-douchebag-train-a-roundup#commentsBaywatchblogsdouchebag decreeEconomygender rolesKendra WilkinsonmenstruationMichael BayrecessionSarah PalinSteve KingtamponsDigiBitchThu, 09 Jul 2009 21:39:16 +0000Kjerstin Johnson1857 at http://bitchmagazine.orgTransformers 2: Offensive Archetypes in Disguisehttp://bitchmagazine.org/post/transformers-2
<p><center><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3214/3008635758_a8c6604670.jpg?v=1226622254" /></center></p>
<p>Internet buzz about Michael Bay's (director of landmark crap-tion films like <i>Armageddon, Pearl Harbor, The Island</i>) latest film <i>Transformers 2 </i> has mostly centered around who has the most scathing review, how hot Megan Fox is, and a few murmurs concerning coded racism in two of the robots.<br /></p>
<p>The rumors are true: twins Mudflap and Skids are Stepin Fetchits. They constantly fight, they talk in ebonics, and exist only for "comedic" effect. Just visually comparing the two, the Twins are complete messes compared to the other "good" robots.<br />
<center><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2575/3683185868_bed3ede00f.jpg?v=0" /> versus...<br />
<img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2655/3683185960_d9b08342d0.jpg?v=0" /></center></p>
<p>(That's Optimus Prime, alpha male of the universe. Autobots want to be him, Deceptacons want to....kill him--stop me if my plot synopsis is getting too dicey. When not in robot form, he's is a hulking, diesel-guzzling eighteen wheeler--no wonder he's such close buds with the US Army!)</p>
<p>Michael Bay's response to the criticism is flip, saying,"We're just putting more personality in. I don't know if it's stereotypes — they are robots, by the way." In the <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090624/ap_en_mo/us_film_transformers_jar_jar_again">same AP article,</a> Allyson Nadia Field of UCLA explains how robots, or <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOcVkofa1AU">crows, </a>or <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5C9JX6VRjn0">aliens, </a> can actually be stereotypes: "There's a persistent dehumanization of African-Americans throughout Hollywood that displaces issues of race onto non-human entities. It's not about skin color or robot color. It's about how their actions and language are coded racially."</p>
<p>Eh. Says Bay, "Listen, you're going to have your naysayers on anything. It's like is everything going to be melba toast? It takes all forms and shapes and sizes." Yep. All forms and shapes and sizes and stereotypes. </p>
<p>For just a brief glimpse of these characters, fast forward to :25 of this preview:<br />
<center></center></p>
<object width="400" height="225"><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always" /><param name="movie" value="http://vimeo.com/moogaloop.swf?clip_id=4719904&amp;server=vimeo.com&amp;show_title=1&amp;show_byline=1&amp;show_portrait=1&amp;color=d6d6d6&amp;fullscreen=1" /><embed src="http://vimeo.com/moogaloop.swf?clip_id=4719904&amp;server=vimeo.com&amp;show_title=1&amp;show_byline=1&amp;show_portrait=1&amp;color=d6d6d6&amp;fullscreen=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" width="400" height="225"></embed></object><p></p>
<p>And believe it or not, the twins aren't the only racially problematic issues of the movie. The opening scene is a textbook definition of the <a href="http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&amp;lr=&amp;id=KfmTkKmEkiIC&amp;oi=fnd&amp;pg=PA366&amp;dq=bell+hooks+%22eating+the+other%22&amp;ots=4Vo8rAH7CS&amp;sig=KVuRn3_BNgBAFPp-IicYtQolc3U">Native Other. </a>Conflating all brown people, a nameless, mute, half-clothed and body-painted tribe hunts…a tiger….in the desert (and if I followed the idiotic plot throughout the movie--not easy!--I think that desert is supposed to be in Egypt. You know, Egypt! Land of tigers and aborigines). In one shot, a hunter opens his mouth and yells something. It's done in slow motion and emphasizes the baring of his teeth, and it seemed like a very purposeful way of dehumanizing him. Then there's the citizens of Jordan and Egypt who are rendered invisible, speechless, and militarily-impotent (Jordanian soldiers fly in to assist the US against the robots--yes I watched the movie this long--but end up crashing.)</p>
<p>Apparently the sequel has brought in more women than the original movie as well, but not for its strong female roles. <i>Transformers</i> is soaked in the male gaze, from when the dad of Shia LeBoef's character Sam asks his college-bound son "How long are you gonna be riding that scooter?" which cuts to Megan Fox bent over, ass up on a motorcycle in the shop she works at, to the multiple slow-motion shots of the heroine panting through the desert in a tank top. </p>
<p>The other notable female in the movie, Isabel Lucas, plays a mysterious vixen that Sam meets when he arrives at college (a school so idealized <a href="/post/i-love-an-idealized-hypermasculine-version-of-college-an-update">Asher Roth </a>probably has wet dreams over it). At first I was rolling my eyes at another stereotype: Lucas plays the whore to Megan Fox's Madonna, the sex-crazed slut who'll stop at nothing to seduce our hero (doesn't she know he is in a committed relationship?!), when in the middle of sex scene she totally transforms into this creepy, violent Deceptacon (that's an evil Transformer, btw) and then she tries to kill him with this spiky chain thing that comes out of her butt! For a second I was going to argue that by using sex as a means to get what you want can be subversive and empowering but then I remembered I was watching <i>Transformers 2 </i>and that Lucas' character (and all the accompanying crotch shots) are not, in the least, revolutionary. (It was still kinda cool when she tried to kill him with the butt chain).</p>
<p><center><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2557/3683185740_83931c00cf.jpg?v=0" /><br />
<i>Heartbreaker in disguise!</i></center></p>
<p>The third (and final female character to have more than one line) is LeBoeuf's mother, another atrocious caricature--a hysterical, submissive wife and mother who is subjected to way too many embarrassing lines to address here. </p>
<p>The US military plays a big role in the film—they save the world (by destroying Shanghai, a small Egyptian town, and the Great Pyramids), and are besties with the Autobots (those are the good Transformers!). But despite their strong presence throughout the movie, I counted <b>two</b> women in intelligence or military positions--both shown for a hot second, both white. Two seems to be the magic gender quota in robo-world too, as the only other female robot I spotted besides the sexy co-ed fembot was a motorcycle who briefly appears here and there (I was kinda hoping for a while that the Transformers lived in a gender utopia without sexism). How did I know it was a female Transformer? Well, it's pink, and because it's on the Internet:<br />
<center><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3654/3683185788_0535d4c405.jpg?v=0" /><br />
<i>Pink + Boobs = Girl</i></center></p>
<p>It shouldn't shock anyone that Michael Bay's latest lacks a feminist perspective of film and society. It's just troubling that it's made SO MUCH MONEY. </p>
<p>I don't have the latest numbers, but it pulled in $390.4 million worldwide in five days, breaking historical film records. From <a href="http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118005468.html?categoryid=1236&amp;cs=1">Variety: </a></p>
<blockquote><p> <i>Transformers 2</i> came within shouting distance of the best five-day gross of all time: $203.8 million for WB's <i>The Dark Knight.</i> Overseas, the action tentpole grossed $166.1 million as it opened day and date in virtually every territory (pic opened the weekend before in the U.K. and Japan). Official tally was ahead of the Sunday estimate of $162 million. Either way, <i>Transformers 2</i> scored the second best international opening of all time, after <i>Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End</i> ($216.3 million), <i>Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix</i> ($193 million) and <i>Spider-Man 3</i> ($164.9 million).</p></blockquote>
<p>There are a TON OF PEOPLE watching this crap! As a friend of mine put it, "Two percent of America saw <i>Transformers </i>this weekend." And Michael Bay obviously sees money as the only indicator of success. His blog <a href="http://www.michaelbay.com/newsblog/newsblog.html">Michael Bay Dot Com</a> is super defensive about critics, and he justifies it all with "it's what the people want." </p>
<blockquote><p>
The 400 critics around the globe spoke. Then fans around the world spoke.</p>
<p>Transformers made $60.6 million dollars in the United States for a total of around $100 million from the world on opening day! One of the biggest single days in movie history. Then [sic] never seem to understand that I make movies for people to take a ride and escape.</p></blockquote>
<p><center><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2665/3683185698_25cee231ec.jpg?v=0" /><br />
<i>Michael "No one understands me" Bay</i></center></p>
<p>And from <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000881/bio">IMDB:</a></p>
<blockquote><p>
There are tons of people who hate me. They hate my movies and whatnot. But you know, hey, my films have made a lot of money around the world. 2-something billion dollars, that's a lot of tickets. They said that I wrecked cinema. They said that my, uh...cutting style. They say I cut too fast. And yet now you see it in movies everywhere. Do I take pride in people knowing my style? I think it's nice people know a director has a style. And you can reinvent yourself too.</p></blockquote>
<p><center><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3641/3683185080_fabe346ed6.jpg?v=0" /><br />
<i>Michael "They say I cut too fast" Bay</i></center></p>
<p>How will Michael Bay reinvent himself for the third Transformers picture? <a href="http://www.avclub.com/articles/get-to-know-your-transformers,29604/">What coded stereotype will be featured next? </a> Will he introduce a fourth female character or cut it down to two? Maybe 1.5? Which new city will the United States save by bombing to rubble? Has any other reasonable person even SEEN this movie?! Lemme know!</p>
http://bitchmagazine.org/post/transformers-2#commentsdouchebag decreefilmfilm critiquesfilm reviewsMegan FoxMichael BayobjectificationracismRobots in disguisesexismstereotypesTransformers 2: Rise of the FallenDigiBitchFri, 03 Jul 2009 01:22:12 +0000Kjerstin Johnson1832 at http://bitchmagazine.org